Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State--well, she has had executive experience, wearing the pantsuit in the Clinton family for the last 25 years....
Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce (careful Bill, remember Ron Brown)
Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff
Eric Holder as Attorney General.....Clintonistas all.
However, maybe Barry realized that the job of running the country is too big for man children like him and he needed some adults in the room. Maybe, just maybe, there is a hidden sign on the White House door that says, if you are not an adult, you need one to accompany you farther. I don't know, but this whole thing looks more like Bubba's third term, or Carter's second. More on that in a minute. But first, let's look at the end of Bubba's 2nd term:
a recession, a dot com bubble bursting, terror on the rise, and a presidency in shambles. Yeah, great to build off of. NOT.
Now, you might be asking, Mark, why did you mention Jimmy Carter? Glad you asked. Aside from the ignorant toothy grin, what else does Barry Obama share with the Peanut Farmer? Well, I would say both had a total lack of experience but at least Jimmy Carter actually ran something, the State of Georgia, and actually had a life worthy of at least one biography (let alone the two empty ones Obama self righteously wrote) when he took office. But there is more. Economic adviser Paul Volcker.
WAIT!!!! Hold on, Mark, you say...You must be out of your mind....Volcker is the bomb, he is a Reagan guy....he was Reagan's adviser too. However, folks, before he got supplyside religion, he was Carter's. And remember what he brought to Carter's time: Stagflation....woohoo...Good times.....Bartlett gives us this gem about how Volcker will not truly save the economy, but merely do the bidding of Massuh Obama, because that is what he did before:
Under pressure from Wall Street, Carter reluctantly appointed Paul Volcker to be chairman of the Federal Reserve Board in 1979. Volcker had been under secretary of the Treasury for Richard Nixon and was then serving as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. However, it is naïve to think that Volcker was given a free hand by Carter. His inability to fully implement a tight-money policy is why the inflation rate fell only to 12.5 percent in 1980, despite a sharp recession that year.
It was only after the election, when Volcker knew that Carter had lost, that he really clamped down on the money supply. This illustrates an important point: Presidents get the Fed policy they want, no matter how “independent” the Fed may be. If there had been any doubt about this, it was settled in 1967, when Fed chairman William McChesney Martin buckled under pressure from Lyndon Johnson and eased monetary policy even though Martin knew he should have tightened it. This caused inflation to jump from 3 percent in 1967 to 4.7 percent in 1968 and 6.2 percent in 1969.
It is not now remembered how much pressure there was on Reagan to get rid of Volcker and have the Fed run a more accommodative monetary policy. Yet he not only supported Volcker publicly, he appointed like-minded people to the Fed whenever he had the chance. He reappointed Volcker to the chairmanship in 1983 and appointed Alan Greenspan to replace him in 1987.
The result of the Fed’s tight-money policy was a far faster reduction in inflation than most economists thought feasible. From 12.5 percent in 1980, it fell to 8.9 percent in 1981, and 3.8 percent in 1982. It is hard to explain just how remarkable this achievement was. Most economists would have considered it impossible in 1980, especially given the big 1981 tax cut, which was generally viewed as pouring gasoline on the fire of inflation by economists schooled in Keynesian economics.
But Reagan was firm in his belief that the money supply — and only the money supply — fundamentally determined the inflation rate. However, he also knew that other policies could ease the transition to a low-inflation economy. Toward this end, Reagan cut tax rates and reduced business regulation to increase the production of goods and services; deregulated the price of oil, which broke the OPEC oil cartel; and fired striking air-traffic controllers, which helped get the wage-price spiral under control.
Ironically, the far greater success of bringing down inflation is what really created the deficit problem. High inflation had pushed people into higher tax brackets, which had caused federal revenues to rise automatically. But low inflation eliminated this bracket creep. This factor alone added $41 billion to the deficit in 1981 and $64 billion in 1982, according to Office of Management and Budget.
Breaking the back of inflation was an enormous accomplishment. Reagan deserves much of the credit. Larger budget deficits were an unavoidable consequence.
So, Carter's second or Bubba's third. Either way, we are screwed. Wait, that might be looked upon as being in a rage, or apocalyptic. Let me say instead that we face challenges that Obama cannot meet, because he is more about playing President than in doing the job.
